Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-14-2005, 06:14 AM
Chris Cavell Chris Cavell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 4,831
Default Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Introduction:

This thread is the fruit of many e-mail correspondences I've made over the past few years. I've received literally dozens of repeat questions regarding every aspect of the album creation process, from basic mic techniques to royalty collection. I hope to use this thread to compile a concise, straight forward, and easy to understand resource of answers to some of the most common and pertinent questions I've been asked. If you feel up to it, give it a gander...hopefully you'll gain something from it. Keep in mind as this thread grows that some of the methods and approaches I'll give are merely my preferred techniques and should not be taken as the ONLY way of doing something. The process of creating a recording is as much art as it is science...and every engineer develops his own style and techniques as he progresses in this craft. I hope my writings here help to improve and educate you in a kind fashion on your journey in this industry.

Cheers,
Chris

Chapter 1: Money Matters and Your Music

The goal in this section is to provide you, the creators of music, information regarding the most common way to make money with your music: royalties collected and distributed by Performance Rights Organizations (from now on we’ll call them PRO’s).

First things first: What is a PRO?

PRO’s are organizations given the authority of their governments to collect money for the use (i.e. performance) of music. An example of how they operate and some of the reasoning behind them: let’s say you visit a beautiful restaurant, and in that restaurant, one of the aspects that attracts you as a customer is the soft, inobtrusive, yet very pleasing music playing in the background that adds to the atmosphere (along with the candles and the really attractive young lady guiding you to your table). The atmosphere is one of the selling points of a fine dining establishment. The argument is that the music playing in the background that aids the restaurant’s business must be paid for.

Another example might be your common music radio station. A radio station is free to hear, but it is a business…and it makes its money by selling ad-space. What determines how much a station can charge for ad-space is known as market-share (basically a measure of how popular the station is in a given region). What attracts listeners and makes a station popular? Answer: the music. In this way, the amount of money a station can make is directly tied to the music they play…and as such, it is only fair that they pay the creators of that music for their contribution to the station’s bottom line.

Understand everything so far? Basically, a PRO has the legal right to collect money on your behalf from any organization or institution where the performance of music (by any means: acoustic or electronic) may be a contributing factor to the income of that organization. In the United States, the PRO’s are the only entities given a constitutional right to collect money in these scenario’s. (In other words, as an individual, you cannot collect this money directly. The money must go through a PRO first. There are very few exceptions to this legal rule, and are generally handled on a case by case contract basis.)

What does this imply for the writers of music? Simply put, they need to join a PRO to get their piece of the pie.

Sounds rough doesn’t it…joining some large “club” just so you can get paid…don’t worry…it’s no big deal. Typically, PRO membership is free. Each PRO has a number of advantages they provide optionally for their members, such as instrument insurance, legal advice, collaboration conferences, etc. Take a look at the PRO’s available in your country to see which suits you best…then sign up. (Normally, an individual is allowed membership to only one PRO.) Remember to register your songs with the PRO once you join. How else are they going to know that a given song is yours? (Registering songs is also an easy process...usually just a form you fill out and send in.)

(For a list of most of the PRO’s worldwide, visit http://www.cisac.org . CISAC serves as a global footing for PRO’s…sort of like the U.N. of PRO’s…holding them accountable for their practices and focusing their efforts across all nations, and is a great source of information regarding the various PRO’s impressions on the global music community.)

So, what have we covered so far…to be completely honest…almost nothing. I’ve basically told you that in order to get your share of money, you need to join a PRO. That’s barely scratching the surface. I can hear your thoughts coming across the keyboard in drones, “How does a PRO know how much to pay who? What about cover songs? What about…???” Patience kimosabe…I’m getting to it…

To answer the first question, “How does a PRO determine who gets what?”, I’ll try to state it as simply as possible: statistics and math.

PRO’s compile playlists from several sources: radio stations, juke boxes, TV. stations, individuals who submit that they had something performed, etc. The process is far from perfect…but, essentially, a sampling of what is played, when, and where is fed into some pretty hefty and complex mathematical models that determine how to split up the pie. The whole calculation can take up to a year! For this reason, you generally won’t see a check for an entire year from the performance date, but after this point, you would regularly receive checks every three months.

Since this process’ inception, the PRO’s have sought ever more accurate ways of gathering and analyzing this data that minimize the effects of error (human or otherwise) on the final payouts. Remember, the PRO’s exist to benefit you, the creators of these musical works…it is their mission….and they are continually exploring and advancing their methods of playlist creation and data analysis. There are two recent advancements in this area that you should be aware of: ISRC, and MediaGuide. I’ll speak more about ISRC’s in a bit…suffice it to say for now that ISRC’s are a means to uniquely identify and track a recording’s performances.

MediaGuide is a new approach to playlist creation currently being explored by ASCAP (one of the three main PRO’s in the US). It basically sets up a bunch of computerized listening devices that can identify a song in much the same way the FBI can match an unknown face to a name using face recognition technology. The data is collected, stored, and analyzed. I’m not personally privy to whether or not ASCAP is currently including the information gathered from this system in their current mathematical models or merely testing it’s viability. What I can tell you is that in order for the MediaGuide system to recognize and identify your music, you must submit your music, in finished album form, to MediaGuide. So, if you’re a member of ASCAP, I strongly urge you to send an album off to MediaGuide (ASCAP doesn’t do this for you)…it couldn’t hurt…and could mean a bigger wad in your back pocket over time. (Mediaguide’s website contains all the information you need to properly submit your recordings to their service: http://www.mediaguide.com/ )

Onward to the topic of ISRC’s: (taken from www.ifpi.org)
Quote:

The ISRC (International Standard Recording Code) is the international identification system for sound recordings and music videorecordings. Each ISRC is a unique and permanent identifier for a specific recording which can be permanently encoded into a product as its digital fingerprint. Encoded ISRC provide the means to automatically identify recordings for royalty payments.

ISRC’s are a 12 digit alpha-numeric code digitally encoded into master recordings. These codes can be read by nearly all current production CD players…and can be implemented in such a way that removes all human interaction from the playlist creation process. Their use to this end is very widespread in Europe and catching on faster and faster in the United States. It is one of the ways that most digital performances are now tracked (this includes internet broadcasts, satellite radio, etc).

It is important to note that in order to persuade stations to convert their playlist creation methods to this format, rules and regulations have been created in certain areas that do not require the stations to “fill in the blanks” for items played which do not contain ISRC’s. This means that you should definitely get them put onto your album!!!

“How do you go about doing this?” you ask. It’s easy, and most importantly, free. The first seven digits of an ISRC are set in stone, and you decide the last five. The first two digits designate the country of origin, and the next three are assigned to you by the authorized ISRC agency in your country and are referred to as the Registrant Code. The following 2 digits designate the year in which the ISRC is applied to the recording. The final five digits are up to your choosing. You then take these numbers (a different one for each track of the album) and give them to the mastering engineer of your choosing to encode into the pre-master you send off for duplication. Most modern CD-burning programs allow you to manually encode the ISRC if you don’t wish to go the mastering route with your album, just make sure that the burner you use includes this ability (many older models do not). If you forgot to do this with the mastering engineer or on your personally burned copy, don’t worry…they can apply them retroactively at the manufacturing/duplication facility. Just send them a list detailing which ISRC belongs to which track on the album.

To obtain a registrant code, all you need to do is find the authorized ISRC Agency in your country, fill out a little form, sign it, then mail it, fax it, or scan it and e-mail it back to them. The employees of these authorized ISRC Agencies are extremely helpful and openly welcome any questions you might have regarding the process. (To find the ISRC Agency for your country, visit http://www.ifpi.org/isrc/ .)

To sum up this chapter's key points:
1. Join a PRO (Performance Rights Organization)
2. Register your music with the PRO
3. Be sure to encode ISRC's in your albums
4. If you're a member of ASCAP, send a copy of the finished product to mediaguide

and a total no-brainer we haven't even touched upon:
COPYRIGHT YOUR MATERIAL!!!

There you have it: the down low info on the most common way to make money with your music. I’ll add a section regarding how to handle recording cover songs legally, and how performances of cover songs are generally handled by PRO’s as time permits…but this is all the time I’ve got for now. I strongly urge you to bring any inaccuracies, corrections, or additions you think I should make to my attention. Special thanks go to Cakes and Lemix for their contributions to this chapter.

Chapter 2: Microphones

There are three primary types of microphones used in recording studios today: dynamic microphones, condenser microphones, and ribbon microphones. There are other types and adaptations to these that I’ll discuss briefly at the end of this chapter, but these three basic forms of microphones will get the bulk of attention.

The first and most common type of microphone in use today is the dynamic microphone. It operates on the same principle as a speaker, only in reverse. (To understand how this works, we must first be introduced to a basic physical principle: moving a metal through a magnetic field can generate a current through that metal.)

There are three necessary ingredients to a dynamic microphone: a diaphragm suspended in a way so that it vibrates sympathetically with acoustic vibrations, a coil of wire attached to the diaphragm, and a magnet to immerse the coil in a stationary magnetic field. As sound hits the diaphragm it causes the diaphragm to vibrate. This vibration in turn causes the coil to move up and down in the stationary magnetic field generated by the magnet. This induces a current in the coil of wire corresponding to the acoustic vibration which is passed on to a preamp for amplification.

Some of the characteristics of dynamic microphones are relatively poor transient response, fair frequency response/bandwidth, the capability to produce high output levels, the ability to endure high sound pressure levels, and high physical durability. These last two characteristics are some of the reasons that dynamic microphones are often chosen over others in certain strenuous applications such as close micing drums. Some common examples of dynamic microphones are the Shure SM57, AKG D112, and Sennheiser MD421.

The next type of microphone we’ll talk about is the condenser microphone. It’s principle of operation is considerably more complex in it’s complete description than that of a dynamic microphone, but I’ll do my best to make it as easy to understand as possible. Condenser microphones are often called “capacitor mics”, because their principle of operation is electrically identical to a capacitor. Essentially, a capacitor microphone is made of two “plates”, one is positively charged and the other is negatively charged. These two plates are separated by a very small distance, and this distance determines the capacitance. One of the two plates in a condenser microphone is made of a tensioned thin conductive film (conductive so a charge can be placed on it) and is called the diaphragm. As acoustic waves impact the diaphragm, it is moved ever so slightly. These small movements affect the spacing b/w the two plates of the capacitor, and therefore affect the capacitance. The changes in capacitance are then converted into an electrical signal of the type expected by a preamp.

Condenser microphones are typically characterized by fairly flat frequency response and wide bandwidth, good transient response, and are usually fairly rugged (although delicate in comparison to the typical dynamic microphone). Condenser microphones are an excellent choice for any application that requires fairly accurate reproduction of the source sound. Their extended frequency response also makes them the ideal microphone for sources with high frequency overtones, such as cymbal overheads. Some of the more popular condenser microphones in use today are the Neumann U87, the AKG C414, and the increasingly popular yet relatively cheap Oktava MK012. Traditionally, condenser microphones are more expensive than dynamic mics. However, current trends in trade and manufacturing processes have seen the cost of quality condenser microphones plummet in recent years, and can often be found for less than one hundred dollars!

The third primary form of microphone in use in recording today is the ribbon mic. Thanks to Wes Dooley and his company, Audio Engineering Associates (AEA), the long forgotten ribbon microphone has seen a marked resurgence in the past few decades. The ribbon microphone operates in much the same way as a dynamic microphone with one main exception: the diaphragm serves as the conductor. Let me explain in more detail.

In a ribbon microphone, there is a corrugated “ribbon” of extraordinarily thin metal. This ribbon is suspended in the middle of the microphone body between the north and south poles of a magnet that wraps around the body of the microphone. This physical configuration places the ribbon right in the middle of the most concentrated area of the magnetic field. As acoustic vibrations hit the ultra-light, ultra-thin ribbon of metal, the ribbon vibrates within this magnetic field. This movement within a magnetic field generates a current along the ribbon, which is then electrically processed and sent to a preamp. The section of magnet that wraps around the body of the microphone usually has holes drilled in it to make it as acoustically transparent as possible; these types of ribbon mics feature a figure-8 pickup pattern. Ribbons without these holes in the magnet are omnidirectional. (I know of no such omnidirectional ribbon microphones being manufactured today.)

The thin-ness of the ribbon in such a microphone is extreme to say the least, often testing the very limits of malleability for the metal in use (the typical ribbon is less than 3 microns thick…often less than 2 microns). As a result, these types of microphones are extremely delicate…and often the most expensive mics on the market. Accidentally dropping a cherished ribbon microphone from the seemingly harmless height of 30 inches (the typical desk height) has brought many a grown engineer to tears. Even an unexpected vocal pop or burst of wind in an outside venue can completely destroy a ribbon microphone. In addition to this physically fragile nature, phantom power will literally burn up most ribbon microphones. Only one mass-manufactured ribbon microphone to date accommodates phantom power…so be careful when plugging one into a preamp with phantom power capability.

Ribbon microphones are characterized by extremely fast, accurate transient response, super-flat frequency response with very poor bandwidth (the typical ribbon mic doesn’t extend all the way to 20 kHz…it’s response is usually characterized by a 12 dB per octave treble falloff that starts it’s descent around 10 kHz), and are extraordinarily delicate to say the least.

Ribbon microphones are ideally suited to “minimalist” and/or “purist” recording styles, where a single stereo mic setup is used to capture an entire performance. Such methods are often used in live recording of orchestral concerts. The ultra fast transient response and treble rolloff make them an ideal choice for vocal (as long as you employ a pop filter).

(I’ve seen a trend today where many engineers have started experimenting with ribbon mics as overheads for drums. I’ll go ahead and caution against this, as the high SPL of percussion recording can easily damage a ribbon microphone, and the ribbon microphone’s typical frequency response often leaves the engineer with less than the desirable amount of cymbal sheen necessary in today’s contemporary music production. Don’t say I didn’t warn you!)

One type of microphone which is seen less often in studio use, but quite frequently in everyday applications, is the electret condenser microphone (ECM). ECM’s are tiny, and operate almost identically to a regular condenser microphone. The primary difference b/w the two is that an ECM’s plates are permanently charged; an outside voltage doesn’t have to be supplied by phantom power to charge the plates. Unfortunately, until recently, the electret material used in these microphones could be considered “pseudo-permanently” charged. They were characterized by increasingly poor levels and frequency response with age, and often considered unusable when hitting their 10 or 15 year birthday. As a result, there is currently no viable vintage market for these microphones. Perhaps in years to come…

The most popular electret condenser microphone used today is probably the Shure SM81 and is almost always used for overhead micing of drums. However, as other manufacturers have started producing true condenser microphones at ever cheaper prices, the SM81 has seen less and less use by the majority of engineers.

There is a type of microphone that defies categorization based on principles of the transducer element employed: the boundary layer microphone. A boundary layer microphone can be made of any one of the aforementioned microphones types and derives its special nature from its physical configuration.

A boundary layer microphone is simply a microphone that is positioned in such a way that it takes advantage of the special acoustic characteristics found in a very small gap between a microphone element and a flat acoustically reflective surface. The boundary layer microphones most familiar to audio engineers today are the Crown line of Pressure Zone Microphones (PZM). The next time you are around one of these microphones, take a good look at them. What you’ll find is that they are actually an electret condenser mic aimed directly at the center of the square plate and have a tiny gap about the thickness of 2 business cards between the mic and the plate.

The advantage to such a configuration has to do with the way sound bounces off the plate and enters the microphone element in such a small gap: the reflected sound is completely in-phase with the direct sound within this small gap. This translates into a level boosted uniform pickup response with an incredibly low signal to noise ratio (due to the 6 dB level boost resulting from the in-phase reflections). These microphones are also almost entirely immune to physical vibration of the mounting surface (which makes them an ideal choice to tape inside the lid of a piano for sound reinforcement).

Boundary layer microphones are by definition omni directional. However, the physical configuration of the mounting plate and other acoustic reflectors, obstacles, or vents can be used to shape the pickup pattern into a hemispherical or even quarter-spherical shape.

(There are a few other transducers I hope to add to this chapter as time allows…but I figured this was enough for now…)

THE BIGGEST MIC MYTH TODAY: “Large diaphragm mics have “better” bass than small di mics.”

Perhaps some of you have made mic purchases in the past based on this myth. I’m sorry to disappoint you, but few myths in the audio industry could so completely contradict reality. In fact, small diaphragm microphones’ bass response is so incredibly accurate by comparison that it isn’t even a fair competition. It has to do with the physics of sound.

With a large diaphragm microphone, bass frequencies tend to be out of phase at one edge of the diaphragm compared to the time of arrival at the opposite edge. This leads to a bass rolloff (as the combined out-of-phase bass cancels) with large diaphragm mics. Small diaphragm mics are small enough that the difference in phase at one edge compared to the opposite edge is minimal…usually even negligible. This property of large diaphragm vs. small diaphragm microphones is easily seen in the pattern response diagrams of the two.

Most pattern response diagrams show multiple lines, each at a different frequency. If you explore this, you’ll see a trend b/w the two types of microphones: the pattern response of small diaphragm microphones is far more uniform and accurate in the low frequencies than that of large diaphragm microphones.

Don’t worry though…you can use this knowledge to your advantage. It opens up a whole new world of mic position possibilities with large di mics b/c you can now intelligently tailor the low end by simply rotating the microphone off axis (experiment with a boomy acoustic guitar…or even on your vocals).


Cheers,
Chris
__________________
Cavell Studios
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-14-2005, 07:12 AM
lemix's Avatar
lemix lemix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 10,894
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips


Great job Chris...THANK you !
I'd just like to add two links for our Canadian "forum-ites"..in close relation to your opening topic. We do have a strong Canadian membership here on the DUC, myself ( ..from Hungary.. ) included...
#1
#2
cheers,
__________________
cheers,
Andrew


W7 pro 64_i7 3930K_16GB_ Nuendo 6.5.4-7.1.3 / PT 12.4 ------Mac Mini OSX Lion_PT 10.xx
Allen&Heath GS R-24M_ full rack of vintage analog boxes _UAD2_Nugen_iZotope_Melda_Waves_Plugin Alliance_DMG and more
2.0 and 5.1 monitoring
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-14-2005, 09:32 AM
tempest18 tempest18 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle, UK
Posts: 225
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Thanks Chris, Great thread.

You know, I always wondered what ASCAP was next to each song writers name on most of the albums I have. So basically any pop star or whoever, writer has to be signed up to one or the other. I was always under the impression that all the big name stars just automatically got boat loads of money sent through their doors.

Chris Tempest
__________________
Digi 002R
Athlon 64 3400
K8V SE Deluxe
Crucial 1gig DDR PC3200 CAS3
Western Digital 80GB x2
Radeon 9200SE 64 DDR
Enermax Noisetaker 370W
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-14-2005, 11:30 AM
Chris Cavell Chris Cavell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 4,831
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Tempest,

Generally speaking, yes. However, strictly speaking, ascap and bmi are american agencies. Each country has it's own agencies which have been legally granted the right to collect money's for broad licensing of "performances". In the UK, you'd have to find your authorized agency.

Most of the legal and worthwhile agencies are members of an international organization known as CISAC. CISAC serves to organize and direct the activities of these various companies toward one common goal: collecting and distributing money. They have a searchable index on their site which will point you to all their member societies located in the UK.

If you wanted to collect money from counties besides your own, there are different ways to go about it. Most of the larger collection agencies have alliances with foreign collection agencies to handle this sort of thing automatically for the larger markets (the US, Canada, and the UK are very intertwined in this regard). You could also independently hire a publisher (that is a member of one of these organizations) in the foreign country to handle ALL of the work in that foreign country for you. Generally speaking, they charge around 30% (give or take 15%) of the collected royalties in that country. Or, your product could be picked up by one of the labels in that country, and you'd enter into a contract that restricts that label's reach as far as your product goes, and hands over all the proper royalty distribution responsibilities to that label. There are literally dozens of ways to pull it off...

In case you couldn't tell, I'm trying deliberately to stay away from intellectual property and copyright law in this thread...it gets really hairy really fast, especially when it comes to collecting from foreign entities. This is just one of the benefits to finding an experienced entertainment lawyer...not to sue people, but as a consultant first and foremost.

Cheers,
Chris
__________________
Cavell Studios
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-14-2005, 11:44 AM
tempest18 tempest18 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle, UK
Posts: 225
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Sorry I was probably refering to most US albums. The music over here doesnt really have anything to offer me apart from the odd artist. I just purchase my albums from amazon.co.uk imports as Virgin dont get them in.

BTW I heard your work on BubbaJs tracks. They sound great. Really tight and punchy. I liked Bones the most, thats the kinda beat i like.

It'll be good to get this thread going because while I know alot have a great depth of knowledge within Protools and music in general Im not sure people will have delved into the theoretical side of money management and collecting techniques. Even though I doubt i'll be selling music or getting mine played on radio ever, its useful to know this stuff just incase the oportunity pops up. Im sure the big stars would leave these kind of duties to lawyers as they probably dont have the time on their schedule to sort this out, or are just too stupid.

I doubt any of them will have done a hard days work in their life!

Thanks

Chris Tempest
__________________
Digi 002R
Athlon 64 3400
K8V SE Deluxe
Crucial 1gig DDR PC3200 CAS3
Western Digital 80GB x2
Radeon 9200SE 64 DDR
Enermax Noisetaker 370W
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-14-2005, 11:53 AM
bigbubbaj bigbubbaj is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 1,457
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Quote:


BTW I heard your work on BubbaJs tracks. They sound great. Really tight and punchy. I liked Bones the most, thats the kinda beat i like.

Not a hijack attampt. The drums and bass were well recorded to begin with
__________________
5198 Studios
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-14-2005, 12:06 PM
Chris Cavell Chris Cavell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 4,831
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Quote:
I doubt any of them will have done a hard days work in their life!
I think you'd be very very surprised to see where many of today's artists were 10 or 15 years ago...

Take 3 Doors Down (not my favorite group, but a great example): they were all employed in oil refineries and manufacturing plants in and around Escatawpa and Bay St. Louis busting their humps for a VERY long time!!! Their trip to a label contract was anything but glorious...they poured every dime they made into recording, gear, and playing every single gig they could possibly land until it finally paid off. Despite my not really being a fan of theirs, I can honestly say that I seriously respect the incredible poverty, hardship and work they put into getting to where they are.
__________________
Cavell Studios
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-14-2005, 03:24 PM
cakes cakes is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 188
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Chris,

Not to nitpick about your otherwise excellent post, but at least in the case of ASCAP, they're moving away from having radio stations report what they played, ISRC or no. At ASCAP's annual membership meeting last year in L.A., they showed us a new software tool (Mediaguide) they're using for their surveys that was able to show you exactly how many times a song was played on a radio station. I'm pretty sure they do it using digital fingerprinting - having computers "listening" to the station and analyzing the signals. This is good for ASCAP because they don't have to rely on the radio stations to do the reporting, so the data collection is faster, and the radio stations have less paperwork to do. They were rolling it out market by market (i.e. they were listening to the top 25 markets at first, then expanding).

I've heard SESAC (much smaller company that competes with ASCAP & BMI) does their surveys using ISRC's somehow.

One place where having ISRC's is *crucial* - if you want to distribute a song digitally through iTunes or any other download site. Those sites require you to have them. CDBaby will get them for you as a service for digital distribution, though of course then the codes won't be encoded into your physical CD's.

I think also the draconian new regulations for Internet radio were going to require webmasters to submit lists of the ISRC's they played, but I don't know whether those regulations were adopted or not.

So basically, yes, having ISRC's is good, and they will probably be used even more frequently in the future, but at least at the moment, if you don't have them, and your song is broadcast on the radio, you will still get paid. The *most* important thing to do if you want your broadcast royalties is to affiliate with a PRO (sorry, performing rights organization - ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC in the States) and register your songs with them.

Thanks for the excellent post. Looking forward to the next one.

cakes

BTW, a place you can see Mediaguide's technology in action is a website called yes.net . You pick your city, radio station, and time, and it will tell you what song was being played then. I think they even have a deal with one of the cellphone companies (Verizon?) so you can hold your phone up to the radio, dial *YES or something, and you get a text message with the name of the song. They showed us all this at the ASCAP meeting.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-14-2005, 04:03 PM
Chris Cavell Chris Cavell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 4,831
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

I'm glad you brought that up Cakes. Similar audio fingerprinting schemes have been proposed in Europe by private companies in the past. ASCAP is currently the ONLY performance rights organization in the world to ever have tried it to my knowledge. This technology faces one heck of an uphill battle for many reasons:

1. The AES (the final word on all things scientific and technical in audio engineering) has wholeheartedly adopted metadata as the only truly viable approach to accurately identifying electronic performances of recorded works.

2. A number of talented mastering engineers (as well as a number of less "talented" consumer level mastering programs and devices that can impliment less intriguing audio fingerprint techniques) have shown to cause (when the intent to prove the fallability of the system is there) a mis-identification rate of %50 or greater. (simply put, the similar systems proposed in the past were very easy to trip up by copying one fingerprint and applying it to an entirely different recording...which is an extraordinarily easy task to accomplish today; I don't know if ASCAP has put MediaGuide to the test in this intentional manner or not)

3. The ISRC code has already been established as the global standard for such data collection...for several years now, and convincing the alternate PRO's to change the systems they already use (in the case of isrc's, they are electronically read and automatically catalogued by computers, no human error involved...so little reason or benefit to change) would be difficult as, quite frankly, it costs a lot of money.

(there are literally hundreds of equally important, but smaller reasons why audio fingerprinting techniques (as opposed to metadata based digital fingerprints like the ISRC) face an enormous uphill battle)

I have no personal experience with MediaGuide, but I'm sure that it's widespread acceptance will take an enormously long time. That being said, it would still be a good idea for members of ASCAP to submit something to MediaGuide to grab as much income as you can while it's around and in case it does catch on despite the enormous odds.

Either way, it's good to know that ASCAP is actually using this thing...I'll be sure to put that tip (of submitting your stuff to mediaguide if ascap doesn't do it for you) when I reorganize this thread as it grows.

Cheers,
Chris
__________________
Cavell Studios
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-15-2005, 05:18 AM
neomodo neomodo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: place
Posts: 288
Default Re: Chris\' Tidbits and Tips

Chris -

Thanks a ton for taking the time to write this stuff down in such a straightforward and concise manner - It is much appreciated fer sure ...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hey Chris T, i have a question... Hotcrazyfruit Eleven Rack 10 05-15-2011 11:05 PM
Chris Daughtry.... Deafeye General Discussion 0 01-30-2007 10:40 PM
thanks for the help chris! butteredtoast 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 1 07-10-2004 12:56 PM
interesting MonsterCable, M.Jackson tidbits. ThatHitSound Tips & Tricks 10 08-26-2003 06:03 AM
Chris Coleman Machead 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 11 05-11-2003 05:06 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:33 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com